On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 16:59:36 -0800, Tris Schuler wrote:
>Very good discussion, Barry.
Thanks.
>I agree with your point re getting to the end result through whatever means
>you have at hand. With art it is about many things, and while the process
>is important it's the result we look at and interact with
I'd change the emphasis slightly - the process is ultimately only important to
the artist or those who would mimic his work. I'm reminded of recent
speculation
that many Renaissance painters were actually tracing their subjects or using
some sort of projection device to produce their paintings. The reaction by many
critics and historians has been a resounding "so?".
>My regret isn't that digital is here or even that it will one day supercede
>a then-dead emulsion side of photography. It's that it must lead to a
>diminution of photographic knowledge and experience all around. Society
>will be the loser if I'm right. Again, I hope I'm wrong.
With regard to the general public, you're absolutely correct. But even today,
how many people understand what an aperture is or could explain the
relationship between focal length and DOF, much less hold an opinion on
darkroom technique? I can certainly see film becoming more of a niche, but just
as there are painters today who still make their own egg tempura, there will
always be fine art or historically oriented photographers who revel in the
pleasures of silver gelatin.
--
Barry B. Bean
Bean & Bean Cotton Company
Peach Orchard, MO
www.beancotton.com
www.beanformissouri.org
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|